About your Search

20130201
20130228
Search Results 0 to 13 of about 14 (some duplicates have been removed)
hill correspondent kelly o'donnell. you're watching it all from up there. what do we know? harry reid was on the floor today talking about it. we know that he needs five republicans to break, and there is a distinction between those who might be willing to vote for cloture to break the filibuster, but would still plan to vote against him when he would only at that point need just 50 to be confirmed, 51 to be confirmed. >> there is a lot of drama in this, andrea, and it gets complicated. it does come down to that. there are many more republicans that would beotology in the first step support ending the debate, taking the actual vote and then voting against hagel because everyone knows he already has publicly enough votes to be confirmed. we're in this period now where the drama is unfolding over a couple of key things. a group of republicans want information on two subjects. part of that coming from hagel related to past speeches, financial details, that they feel they did not get enough of during his confirmation process and the hearing where many people even his supporters say he did
you think you should be going after harry reid as well? >> well, listen. i think harry reid has been clear that he will bring this for a vote. there's a bipartisan group of members of congress working on this issue, in particular universal background checks. and i don't think that democrats are the issue here. there are a number of republicans including self-proclaimed moderates who have yet to commit to support something that has the support of 90% of americans. columbine may not have happened if we had universal background checks. those guns were purchased at a gun show without checks. this won't solve every issue but it'll go a long way in terms of addressing the problem. >> great to see you. >>> i want to bring in our friday political power panel. gang, it's great to have you all here. let's dive into sequestration because it's just so fun. david brooks' article in the "new york times" saying the president hasn't come up with a proposal to avert sequestration let alone one that is politically plausible. peggy noonan in "the wall street journal" is saying it's always cliff ceiling
. how d special report? how are you doing. >> reporter: good morning, bill. bill: harry reid is talking about this potentially on the floor of the senate. if there is news we'll bring it to our viewers. graham says the debate is not over, it has not been serious. what gives? >> reporter: a couple of things, one is confirmation hearings matter. this was not a good showing for chuck hagel in this confirmation hearing and despite the fact that you have other controversial cabinet nominees who have potentially bumpy confirmation hearings hagel's did not go well, and even folks on the democratic side will acknowledge that, and that has made it even more difficult. then you have the additional problem, from his supporters' point of view, that there are calls for speeches that did not come out for the committee that hagel gave and they never received, and now you have one speech, for example, that a group says that they can get to the committee by friday. its already out of committee, but -- so now it's on the house floor. this vote happens, they need 60 votes. democrats have a 55-45 vote marg
's be honest about why harry reid did that. they were going in recess. if reid held the vote on friday and they got cloture, they would not have had a final vote on him until saturday or sunday. he was accommodating the republicans and the democrats' senate schedule. >> oh, no. >> let's be very clear. >> what's so wrong with voting after the recess? what's so wrong with -- >> why not vote now? is he qualified now? if he is, he's qualified today, thursday and tomorrow. he's qualified. if he's not qualified, vote against him. >> let's take a listen right now with both of you to john mccain on thursday. kristen, i'll get you to respond right after. >> to be honest with you, it goes back to there's a lot of illwill towards senator hagel because when he was a republican he attacked president bush mercilessly, at one point said he was the worst president since herbert hoover, said that the surge was the worst mrunter since the vietnam war, which is nonsense. and was very anti his own party and own people. people don't forget that. you can disagree but if you're disagreeable, people don't for
with the sequester idea. in fact he has the exact time and date when they first pitched it to senator harry reid, july 27th, 2011. what's your read on that? >> very detailed reporting by bob woodward there. it's an interesting take. certainly the republicans have jumped on. it's been a debate over the last few weeks about who -- actual lit last few months about whose idea this was. you have jack lew, the former chief of staff to the president, up for treasury secretary who said it at a hearing. this was a republican idea. you see the president has sort of hinted at that, too. more recently jay carney at the white house has acknowledged this isn't a white house idea. the republicans are making a big issue of that. as much as the white house is fanning the flames of concern now, sounding the alarms this week it was their idea. they're saying the president needs to come and meet us and sort of acknowledge we gave a little bit on the fiscal cliff on taxes and not going to do it this time. that's the strategy the republicans are using to pin it on the white house. >> joann, they're really blaming the
a, quote, filibuster. it won't be a filibuster, but they're forcing harry reid to basically go and get 60 votes to confirm hagel. >> why is that? >> why are they doing it? >> why the change? why the change of heart? >> well, i think mccain has gone back and forth. i think at the beginning he suggested that he might try to block hagel's nomination. then he defended him the other day when the criticism really got out of bounds. and now he's back to saying he may try to block it. but it feels like reid will get his 60 votes. >> he's going to, but willie, they keep going back to benghazi. by the way, listen, we've said here clearly the white house screwed up, the state department screwed up, it was hillary clinton's low point. they asked for security in benghazi. they didn't get it. the ambassador asked for help. he didn't get it. what does that have to do with chuck hagel? >> well, john mccain has been trying to get answers from the white house about benghazi. i think he sees this as a moment of leverage now. he can hold this up. he's got a bunch of republican senators who will fo
and need more time. it was harry reid who called this vote as sort of an attempt to call their bluff saying this is enough, you're delaying this for no reason but i don't think this is going to help the republicans' image especially when they're going around saying we're not actually trying to stop this nomination. we're not actually filibustering, so what are they doing? i think especially for people who are sick of the sort of washington games, this isn't a good image for them. >> jake, let's talk about this break that congress is on. house speaker nancy pelosi blamed republicans for not using this time more productively. take a listen. >> they manufactured the crisis and instead of having us try to avert that crisis they go on a nine-day recess. why? ? why? people outside the congress are saying no deal, no break. >> why, jake, why? >> nancy pelosi did similar things when she had control but that simplifies a complicated issue. democrats and republicans and the president are miles apart when it comes to averting the sequester. democrats want to raise taxes. republicans say they don't wan
Search Results 0 to 13 of about 14 (some duplicates have been removed)